Talk:Canton Everett Delaware III
Should it be mentioned in this article that he was homosexual? He says to Nixon at the end of Day of the Moon that he wanted to marry a black male, to which Nixon replies "I think that the moon is far enough for now". 92.237.115.175 19:40, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
Companion?
He traveled with the Doctor in the TARDIS, was helping save the world and was summoned to The Doctor's wake. Companion? I think so. 92.29.189.121 20:11, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
- In my opinion he's one of those strange gray-area companians (like Rose's mother). --The Great and Grand Count Mall!(Bow down before me!) 06:16, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
I would say ally would be a better definition, it's not like the Doctor openly said join me for some adventures in the TARDIS, he just kinda got roped in with one. --Revan\Talk 14:51, May 1, 2011 (UTC) I'd call Canton a companion. We've got Abigail and Kazran listed in the "Companions of the Eleventh Doctor" template, why not Canton? Jivjov 22:16, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
- The difference between Canton and Abigail and Kazran is that Abigail and Kazran had regular trips whereas Canton, so far, has only been to Florida and back a few times. 82.24.93.170 22:41, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
- The problem with that is that regular trips to not make one a companion. (Lady Christina, Astri, etc.) --Bold Clone 23:01, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
Canton is not a companion. He is an ally, but not every ally of the Doctor's is a companion. I understand there are exceptions for some of the specials, but Canton does not qualify even under those exceptions. 152.132.9.132 17:45, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
There's enough to make a good argument for Canton being a companion. He traveled in the TARDIS and assisted the Doctor for better than three months.
- The Doctor never asked Canton to regularly travel in the TARDIS with him. Boom--headshot. Canton was an ally, not a companion. --Bold Clone 00:27, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
- He never asked Ben and Polly, either.
- There's relevant discussion here in the Panopticon:
- http://tardis.wikia.com/index.php?title=Forum:Disputed_Companions&t=20110516230540
- There seems to be a range of opinions that, in universe runs from exclusive to inclusive. I sort of like the out of universe definition: a contract helps. Boblipton 01:13, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
- The Doctor never asked Canton to regularly travel in the TARDIS with him. Moreover, Canton was never actually a full-time companion. He shared a single adventure with the Doctor; this adventure included a couple a trips in the TARIDS. Riding in the TARDIS does not make you a companion. Long term travel with the Doctor would make you a companion. --Bold Clone 01:22, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Being asked to regularly travel isn't actually a requisite since several of the Doctor's companions, especially those of the First Doctor, were trapped aboard the TARDIS and unable to return home due to it's unpredictability. The arguments for including Canton would be that he assisted the Doctor for an extended period of time (a little over three months), he was invited aboard the TARDIS (which in and of itself is a comparatively rare event) and traveled a few times. Note that Sgt. Benton is considered a companion on this board even though he only flew in the TARDIS once.
- The difficulty with Canton is that while he only participated in one adventure, that adventure was over three months long. Three months of assisting the Doctor plus TARDIS travel should qualify someone for companion status, but the fact that those three months were one long adventure seems to put Canton's inclusion in doubt. Had this two part episode been a twelve part miniseries covering the same period I think there would be less opposition to the idea. In addition, Canton is a recurring character from both his and the Doctor's perspective, since (barring further appearances), it's some 40 years from Canton's point of view between the 1969 adventure and witnessing the Doctor's death, and some 200 years difference for the Doctor. Had this story been structured differently, I don't think there'd be much doubt as to whether Canton is a companion. Dallan007 05:01, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
Incorrect Information
In the article it states that Canton left the FBI because he wants to marry a black man. This is false, he was kicked out of the FBI because he wants to marry a black man. It is clearly stated in the episode, Day of the Moon, at approximately 39 minutes. This is when the Doctor states "Canton just wants to get married, hell of a reason to kick him out of the FBI."
It was also stated in the Impossible Astronaut, at approximately 18min 40sec, that Canton was kicked out of the FBI, when the Doctor was asking River who Canton is. River replies with "Ex-FBI, got kicked out."
While after that she does say "Six weeks after he left the bureau the president contacted him for a private meeting." Leaving the bureau in this case meant leaving due to being kicked out.
24.57.32.64 05:00, May 1, 2011 (UTC)JBonkerz
Is Canton homosexual?
On the Day of the Moon article, it says "Canton Delaware has some similarities with Captain Jack Harkness. Both are disgraced members of special agencies (the FBI and the Time Agency, respectively), both are more trigger happy than the Doctor's usual friends, and both have an interest in the same sex". Is there any proof of this? Cortion 16:24, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
Yes, the person he wants to marry is a man. He tells this to Nixon at the end of Day of the Moon.----Skittles the hog--Talk 16:28, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
Why must we assume that he is gay because he is marrying a man? He could be bisexual. http://zeroatthebone.wordpress.com/2011/05/22/we-can-do-better-than-this-surely/ 206.83.92.139 16:59, June 1, 2011 (UTC)Brandy
Reading your link, it appears the writer is looking for an argument about ethics rather than Doctor Who. The only evidence regarding his sexuality is that he is gay. Nothing in the episode suggests otherwise.----Skittles the hog--Talk 17:04, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, it's kind of an ethics argument on labeling. But then again, assuming that every gay or lesbian person is bisexual is pretty much labeling as well. Dallan007 20:05, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
I wrote that piece. I was not suggesting, as I reiterated in comments, that everyone should be assumed to be bisexual. I was suggesting that assuming everyone attracted to someone of the same sex is monosexual is disrespectful and contributes to queer invisibility. In short, we shouldn't assume. Perhaps it would be better to say that Canton is kicked out of the FBI because he wants to marry a man, simply because that is something we categorically know, whereas he never explicitly states his sexual orientation. His wanting to marry a man is not evidence that he is gay, it is evidence that he is attracted to a man, and may be gay, may be something else entirely. ChallyZatB 22:15, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
What exactly is the point of saying "his homosexuality and intention to marry a black man"? It's redundant. You're not losing ANY clarity by just saying "intention to marry a black man", *and* you're sticking to information explicitly given in the episode. Also I think 'intention' should be changed to 'desire', like I did before someone reverted my edit, because while yes he *wants* to marry a man, he legally can't, so 'intention' is a little unclear. Seriously though, there is NO REASON to add the word homosexuality there. Forget the ethics argument on labeling, there is no need for a label at all. Why are people objecting to sticking to the information given in the episode instead of inserting fan assumptions? Shiyiya 10:00, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
Like Chally and Shiyiya said, I'm not suggesting that he definitely ISN'T homosexual, or that he definitely IS bisexual. I don't think we should change "homosexual" to "bisexual", because, as Dallan007 pointed out, that would be the same problem. The best solution would be to remove that part of the sentence - saying that he wanted to marry a man is enough. 206.83.92.144 18:59, June 8, 2011 (UTC)Brandy
Now that "homosexuality" has been removed, can we remove "black" as well, or was racism actually a reason for his dismissal? I can't remember the exact dialogue but seeing as it is set in '69 I wouldn't of thought so.----Skittles the hog--Talk 20:56, June 27, 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, that's a good question. It was explictly stated that Canton's partner was black (Nixon asked, and Canton said yes), but it isn't clear whether that was the reason Canton was forced to quit. Without further information it would be difficult to determine whether this was due to racism, heterosexism or both, so I'd err on the side of caution and leave both in. Brandyb 21:18, June 27, 2011 (UTC)
Well for all we know stephen moffat could have created a huge plan/trick where canton is heterosexual, for all we know canton could have been told by the silence to have a desire to marry a black man.
The fact that Nixon asked Canton if the object of his desire is "black" implies Nixon thought that race was the issue (until Canton adds the "...he.") Hoover was born and raised around DC, which was a southern city, and was notoriously racist, and that carried into FBI policies. (The FBI also used a person's closeted homosexuality against them.) It being 1969 didn't matter to Hoover. So race could have been the issue. But being that the Supreme Court invalidated state laws banning inter-racial marriage decades before making any move to protect homosexuals, the gay marriage aspect was probably enough for the Bureau. The fact that in 1969 there was no place in America where two men could get married does confuse the issue.Phil Stone ☎ 16:01, July 13, 2013 (UTC)
Let in on the secret!?
Canton was summoned by the Doctor to Lake Silencio to confirm that the Teselecta was him and dead. Could the Doctor have told Canton the truth to help with his ruse? (173.167.179.77talk to me 23:08, January 31, 2012 (UTC))
Thank you for the fun behind-the-scenes info on the father-and-son Sheppards! :D That's the sort of joyous information I come to wikis like this for!! :D Jay JLOMThings turn out for the best for the people who make the best of the way things turn out - John Wooden 07:58, September 16, 2012 (UTC)
renaming
Name for the article. Why does Canton Everett Delaware III redirect here instead of the other way around? He's only ever referred to as Canton, Canton Three and Canton Everett Delaware the Third. He's literally never called "canton delaware". Ever. Anoted ☎ 01:13, May 20, 2013 (UTC)
